yes, you do need a retina display because it shows the image much clearer. you can zoom into specific spots. the patient can hold it and look around while the doctor explains to them what they are seeing in much higher resolution that 720p. you turned your brain off, didn't you?

Click to expand...

Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.

Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.

Click to expand...

this thread is about the 13in laptop with a retina display. you questioned the purpose of having a retina display in a 13in laptop. well the same reasons apply to the ipad having a retina display. it's pretty simple.

this thread is about the 13in laptop with a retina display. you questioned the purpose of having a retina display in a 13in laptop. well the same reasons apply to the ipad having a retina display. it's pretty simple.

Click to expand...

So in your world a iPad does the job with a retna display. Then why use the 13" laptop?

Seriously man you are REALLY grabbing at straws. There is no practical use and you know it.

I feel that the tension here with the retina display is really over done. Yes you can see things clearer and yes it is more colorful but the original statement was "Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display?"

I feel that the tension here with the retina display is really over done. Yes you can see things clearer and yes it is more colorful but the original statement was "Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display?"

Not the purpose of retina.

Click to expand...

Yup. Anyway I'm really done this time. No one has put forth a legitimate argument against my statement so the debate is over. G'Day sirs.

Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.

Click to expand...

Common sense was the old way. Today they actually base bedside manner training on psychological studies and metrics which has greatly improved doctor/patient relations. Source: Mom, a nurse who has seen the training evolve over a 34 years.

I would use it as a photographer on the go. I find that tablets have their weakness. A thin mbp 13" will take up just slightly more space than an ipad or trasnformer infinity while giving me a good keyboard and battery life. Not to mention I don't have to use "apps".
And no, there's no windows equivalent to this laptop. If there was, I'd take it in a heartbeat

Yeah? Look at my rig. You see any OC or anything? Everything in it was planed out for budget and purpose. Why can't you just admit 2560x1600 at 13" is USELESS FOR ANYTHING.

Click to expand...

WTH are you on about man? I have not read the entire thread, but this is just stupid. If the OS can cope with DPI scaling a high DPI is very very nice indeed. Is the 2,048 × 1,536 the iPad has useless? Not a chance. It puts you closer to the content. Why is that different than this? It would be bad on a Windows machine but to my understanding OSX does that sort of thing way better.

I dont see the point of "Retina" (Which is just a marketting scheme) display on laptop screens. I want to see that shit on 40+ inch TVs.

Click to expand...

Ever used a newer iPad or iPhone? Look at the text, look at the pictures. Reading on an retina iPad is awesome. Why would that be different on a laptop? Again it depends on how the OS does DPI scaling.

WTH are you on about man? I have not read the entire thread, but this is just stupid. If the OS can cope with DPI scaling a high DPI is very very nice indeed. Is the 2,048 × 1,536 the iPad has useless? Not a chance. It puts you closer to the content. Why is that different than this? It would be bad on a Windows machine but to my understanding OSX does that sort of thing way better.

Click to expand...

Last time I checked the goal of retina was to have a pixel density so high that your eye can't tell the difference. If the resolution on the 15" and 13" retina is the same, there is no gain. Just because the display gets better doesn't mean that your eyes do. Anything that you need that crisp of a picture for, you'll be wanting a bigger display anyways. As for the case when doctors are examining x-rays or what ever, I would expect the doctor to use a large display to analyze it then use something like an iPad to show the patient.

I have to agree with TMM on just about every point. There is very little benefit to having retina on a 13", even more so since it's driven by Intel's oh so powerful HD 4000 graphics. There isn't enough in the laptop, in my own opinion, to warrent such a price for a laptop. At this point they should have just ditched the 13 MBP and just relied on the Air. I would rather invest in a retina display on a 13" MBA than an MBP, but if it were my money, I would get neither.

Windows isnt very good at retina. Therefore, retina is crap and worthless. QED.

Windows isnt very good at sex. Therefore, sex is crap and worthless. QED.

Catch my drift?

Retina (or high pixel density) is great. If Windows is shit at scaling, that's windows problem not retina's problem. Retina is for font rendering and readability... just like cleartype attempts to increase pixel density through pixel tricks.

Apple's user interfaces seem to scale pretty well with resolution changes. Nobody complained about iPhone 4/4S which has 4x the pixel density of the iPhone/3G/3GS, yet all the UI stuff is exactly the same. Apple would probably be shunned for putting out a notebook with a screen where you couldn't read anything because it was too small.

I own a late 2011 13" MBP. While I do agree that 2560x1600 on a 13" display is overkill, I wouldn't mind 1080p on this laptop at all.

Click to expand...

i really don't think this is overkill. it has a lot of professional uses and even if you don't use it professionally you still get the huge benefit of a clearer display and less headache. what's more, it pushes the hardware envelope. lcd/led resolution is THE reason for the lag in gpu developement.

For unaware: you can run 1280x800 with perfect pixel mapping on a 2560x1600 display. That means you can run gpu demanding apps at 1280x800 fullscreen with perfect picture quality (same as native resolution).

In Windows 7 it certinaly is a problem. Imagine looking at the login screen with that machine..

Ever used a newer iPad or iPhone? Look at the text, look at the pictures. Reading on an retina iPad is awesome. Why would that be different on a laptop? Again it depends on how the OS does DPI scaling.

Click to expand...

Yes, my friends all have iPhones and iPads. I still dont see the point in running these screens on such small displays. And thats my opinion, judge if you want.